Menu
SUBSCRIBE
SUBSCRIBE
Menu

Critical Infrastructure

Chinese flag and skyline facing the U.S. Capitol across a glowing blue barrier, illustrating AI distillation attacks

Bipartisan House Bill Targets China And Other Adversaries Copying U.S. AI Models

, , , , , , , , , ,

NIST would work with AI companies to define “distillation attacks,” in which a rival trains its model on another model’s answers, and to set out how to detect and prevent them.

 

Reps. Pat Harrigan (R-N.C.) and George Whitesides (D-Calif.) introduced the AI Cyber Defense Act on Oct. 22, a bill that would have the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) work with AI companies to define “distillation attacks” and write voluntary standards for detecting and preventing them.

Distillation is when a smaller or less advanced AI model sends a more capable model large numbers of questions, collects the answers, and uses them to train itself to do similar tasks.

AI developers and their suppliers would help write distillation standards

Within 180 days of the bill becoming law, the NIST director would have to invite private-sector AI companies to work with NIST on the definition and the standards.

The bill defines these companies as businesses that develop, train, deploy, sell, or license AI systems. It also counts businesses that supply substantial computing power, data, or technical services for building or running AI systems.

The standards would exclude companies based in or controlled from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, or Cuba. The NIST director could also exclude other foreign persons or companies. The exclusion would never apply to U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

The standards would be voluntary, with no deadline to finish them

The bill would not require any company to adopt the standards. It sets no penalty for ignoring them and authorizes no additional funding for NIST’s work.

NIST would have 180 days to invite companies to start work on the standards. The bill sets no deadline for finishing them. Once they’re finished, NIST would have up to a year to publish them on its website.

A second group would write standards for using AI in cyber defense

The bill would also have NIST set up an AI Cybersecurity Roundtable within 180 days of the bill becoming law. The roundtable would write voluntary standards and best practices for using AI to defend against cyberattacks. NIST would publish them within one year of setting up the roundtable.

NIST would invite members from the same group of AI companies mentioned above, as well as owners and operators of critical infrastructure. Federal law defines critical infrastructure as systems and assets so vital that losing them would weaken national security, the economy, or public health or safety.

Congress and federal agencies have already targeted distillation

In July, Whitesides and Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio) introduced the House version of a bill from Sens. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). It would let rival AI companies share information about distillation and other foreign espionage without violating antitrust law.

In September, the National Security Agency, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the FBI accused six China-based AI companies of distilling American models. The six include DeepSeek, Moonshot AI and Alibaba. The agencies said the companies collected answers from Anthropic’s Claude, OpenAI’s GPT, Google’s Gemini and xAI’s Grok through millions of exchanges, then used them to train their own models.

The agencies said some distillation is legitimate. They called this activity improper because the companies hid it and broke the U.S. providers’ terms of use. Some intermediary services the companies used hid the origin of the requests, letting them bypass limits on which countries could use the models. China’s Commerce Ministry rejected the accusations.

The bill now goes to the House science committee

The House referred the bill, H.R. 10873, to the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee. To become law, it must pass the House and the Senate and be signed by the president.

An archival photo card of a ship's crew loading chain to anchor a buoy, used by Anthropic for the Anthropic Cyber Mission

Anthropic Launches Cyber Mission to Help Secure Critical Infrastructure and Open-Source Code

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

The security firms that utilities and plant operators already hire can now use Anthropic’s most powerful AI models to find and fix weaknesses in the equipment that runs power, water, and transportation.

 

Anthropic launched the Anthropic Cyber Mission, a long-term effort to protect what it calls “the systems everyone depends on.” The effort starts in two areas: the equipment that runs power grids, water systems, and transportation networks, and the free, shared open-source code that most software is built from.

For the equipment, Anthropic created the Critical Infrastructure Defense Program. It gives the cybersecurity companies that serve utilities and plant operators access to Anthropic’s most powerful AI models and its research on how attackers operate. Anthropic is also sending its own engineers to work on-site. For open-source code, Anthropic launched OSS Scanner, a free service that scans open-source projects for security flaws.

Utilities and plant operators rely on outside security firms

The computer controllers, software, and networks that run power grids, water utilities, factories, and transit networks are built to last for decades. They often cannot be shut down for a fix, so known security flaws can stay open for years. A mistake while making a fix can shut a plant down.

Anthropic said operators of all sizes rely on a small group of trusted outside providers to identify weak points attackers could exploit and to apply fixes while the equipment keeps running. The new program works through those providers.

Consulting firms, security companies, and equipment makers are the program’s first partners

The 11 founding partners include consulting firms that run security programs, security companies that guard business and industrial networks, and manufacturers that build and patch the equipment. The inaugural partners are Accenture, Booz Allen, CrowdStrike, Deloitte, Dragos, Hitachi, Insane Cyber, Nozomi Networks, Palo Alto Networks, PwC, and Rockwell Automation.

Anthropic said several partners already use its Claude models to fix security flaws and help their customers do the same. It is starting with a small group to learn which approaches work. Other companies that build security products or services for critical infrastructure can register their interest.

Anthropic says defenders have not kept up with attackers

Anthropic said AI models that can find and exploit security flaws are “widely available to attackers now,” but defensive tools “have not yet reached enough of the defenders who need them.” It also said government-backed hackers have spent years gaining access to power, water, and other essential systems so they can disrupt them later.

According to Anthropic, finding flaws has become easy, but confirming them, deciding which to fix first, and fixing them still takes time and human effort. In Project Glasswing, Anthropic’s program that lets approved organizations use its most powerful models to find and fix flaws, Anthropic often saw months pass between finding a flaw and fixing it. For industrial equipment, a fix may have to wait until it can be applied safely to running machinery, which in rare cases could take decades.

The Cyber Mission continues Anthropic’s effort to give its AI security tools to more organizations

The Cyber Mission is the latest in a series of Anthropic moves to give defensive AI tools to more organizations and to provide support, in its words, “where it’s most needed.”

In April, Anthropic launched Project Glasswing with about 50 large technology companies, and in June it added about 150 more organizations, including power, water, and healthcare companies. In June, Anthropic also launched a cyber defense program for state, local, tribal, and territorial governments. It gives them access to its most powerful Claude models and technical help to find and fix code flaws, respond to attacks, and test their defenses. Anthropic says the program has since reached more than half of U.S. states. On Oct. 6, Anthropic opened Glasswing to smaller security firms, open-source project managers, and individual researchers.

Anthropic also said it funded the organizations behind widely used open-source code, including the Python Software Foundation and the Apache Software Foundation. In August, it was among more than 150 organizations that signed a letter calling on AI companies and governments to help hospitals, water utilities, local governments, and other essential services first.

Anthropic plans to bring the infrastructure program to more partners and sectors

Over the coming months, Anthropic said it will bring the Critical Infrastructure Defense Program to more partners and sectors and share what it learns, including what didn’t work. It said it expects other AI developers, security companies, and governments to run their own efforts, and that it wants to work with them.

Line drawing of two hands framing a white square with a keyhole, for Anthropic's Project Glasswing expansion.

Anthropic Lets More Vetted Security Teams Test the Hacking Abilities of Its Most Powerful AI Models

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Anthropic is expanding Project Glasswing, its cybersecurity testing program, to smaller security firms, open-source maintainers, and individual researchers.

 

Anthropic said on Oct. 6 that it is expanding Project Glasswing, a program that lets approved organizations use its most powerful AI models to find and fix software security flaws and test their own defenses. Until now, Anthropic limited participants to about 200 organizations that build or maintain widely used software or run services such as power and water. Smaller security firms, open-source maintainers, and individual researchers can now apply.

Why Anthropic started Project Glasswing

When Mythos (then Claude Mythos Preview) launched, it found thousands of cyber vulnerabilities, including those in “every major operating system and web browser.” Some of the exposed vulnerabilities went back over 25 years. Anthropic was concerned these capabilities could fall into the hands of cyber criminals and be used to exploit vulnerabilities at scale.

Anthropic created the Glasswing project and limited the release to a small set of partners, among them Amazon Web Services, Apple, Google, JPMorganChase, and Microsoft, to find and fix flaws in their own software and in open-source software.

In June, Anthropic said it expects other AI companies to have models as capable as Mythos within six to 12 months, and that some could release them without safeguards against misuse. Anthropic describes Glasswing as a way to fix software and set rules for how these models are used before that happens.

The models Anthropic sells to the public, including Claude Opus and Claude Sonnet, block most hacking-related requests.

Glasswing partners found at least 129,000 flaws

Glasswing partners found at least 129,000 verified software flaws between April and July 2026, Anthropic said, and its own scanning of open-source software found 5,500 more between April and October. More than 33,000 of the combined total have been rated critical or high severity so far.

Anthropic said the count is likely too low, because it comes from a survey of only some partners, and that it expects the true number to be at least five times higher.

More organizations can now apply, at three levels

Anthropic merged Glasswing with its Cyber Verification Program, which lets vetted security teams test its Opus and Sonnet models with fewer cybersecurity blocks. The revised program has three levels, and all three cover Claude Opus 5.5, Claude Sonnet 5.5, and Claude Mythos 5.1. The higher the level, the fewer requests the models block and the more Anthropic checks about the applicant.

Defense Access covers protecting systems, such as responding to an attack or confirming that a reported flaw is real. Security teams at companies and government bodies, hospitals, utilities, people who maintain open-source software, and individual researchers with a record of reporting flaws can apply. Anthropic said it aims to answer applications within a few days.

Red Team Access lets organizations attack a system to find weak points, but only against systems they are authorized to test. Individuals cannot apply, and Anthropic said review takes a few weeks.

Specialized Access has the fewest blocks. Anthropic reserves it for a limited number of organizations authorized to test systems such as power grids, flight systems, and the systems banks use to transfer money. Anthropic said it reviews each applicant with the US government. Existing Glasswing partners move to this level.

Anthropic said it will publish more on its work securing open-source software and critical infrastructure in the coming weeks.

Teal light streaks racing down a digital tunnel, on BSA's plan to give defenders first use of AI cybersecurity models

BSA Proposes Giving Cyber Defenders Early Access to Powerful AI Models

, , , , , , , , ,

Qualified organizations would use the models to find and fix security flaws before those capabilities become broadly available.

 

The Business Software Alliance (BSA), an enterprise software trade group, proposed giving trusted cybersecurity organizations early access to powerful AI models before releasing them more widely.

Under the proposal, governments, AI developers, and cybersecurity organizations would form a voluntary partnership to oversee these phased releases. BSA’s announcement did not name a government body to run the partnership, any AI developer that had agreed to participate, or a timetable for creating it.

Defenders would get a head start

The proposal would apply to the most powerful AI cybersecurity models, which BSA said can find security flaws, determine which are most urgent, and exploit them with limited human direction. BSA cited GPT-6 Astra and Mythos as examples but did not say exactly how capable a model would need to be to qualify for the program.

BSA said the same capabilities can help defenders identify weaknesses more quickly or help attackers exploit them. Its proposal would give selected defenders time to locate vulnerabilities and coordinate fixes before attackers gain broad access to the models.

The early users would include cybersecurity providers, software companies, critical infrastructure operators, and organizations working to secure widely used open-source software. BSA also wants to deploy these capabilities more broadly through security platforms that organizations already use. The proposal says the partnership should eventually support both organizations protecting their own systems and providers protecting their customers, but it does not explain how that wider rollout would work.

BSA sets tests for early access

Organizations would need more than cybersecurity experience to qualify. BSA said applicants should show that they have followed applicable laws and accepted practices for reporting and fixing security flaws. The partnership would also examine whether they have the people and resources to use the models effectively and whether their work protects critical infrastructure or widely used technologies. BSA did not say what evidence applicants would need to provide. 

Applicants would also need to show that they could prevent unauthorized access to the models. They would have to disclose who owns or controls the organization and identify any other parties with substantial influence. The partnership would also consider whether the organization has ties to a country of concern that could make granting access risky.

Priority access would be temporary

The proposed partnership would first decide which AI models are powerful enough to require a phased release. Most AI security tools would remain outside the program because they do not materially expand what cybersecurity teams can already do.

The restricted-release period would end once similar models became widely available or the security risks no longer justified limiting access. BSA said participants should know the expected length of the early-access period, but its proposal does not set a maximum duration.

The full proposal also calls for clear application rules and explanations when an organization is denied access. It does not specify who would make those decisions or what steps governments and AI developers will take next to establish the partnership.

Abstract digital network representing organizations working together on a collective cyber defense effort.

More Than 150 Organizations Call for AI Cyber Defense Surge

, , , , , , , , ,

The coalition says hospitals, water utilities, local governments, and other essential services should receive AI security tools, funding, and hands-on support first.

 

More than 150 organizations called for a global surge in cyber defense, warning that they expect AI-driven attacks to become more widespread and sophisticated within months.

The open letter’s signatories include OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Microsoft, Amazon Web Services, major cybersecurity companies, banks, technology providers, and consulting firms.

The letter outlines a broad, shared responsibility for businesses, governments, cybersecurity companies, technology partners, and major AI developers. It does not specify funding amounts, deadlines, or how much support individual organizations will provide.

The signatories did not cite evidence supporting their prediction that AI-powered attacks will become much more capable and widespread within months. They said existing security weaknesses, such as unpatched software and weak access controls, leave businesses and public services exposed as AI gives attackers more powerful tools.

Essential services would receive help first

The coalition called for hospitals, water utilities, local governments, and other essential services with limited security budgets to receive early support.

They call for governments to fund cyber defense for these organizations and expand programs that permit trusted security providers to test their systems. Governments should also coordinate the sharing of information about attacks and help organizations respond and recover.

The letter called on major AI companies to provide access to powerful models, funding, training, and hands-on assistance. Cybersecurity companies and technology providers should help essential-service operators deploy AI security tools, repair weaknesses, and verify that the repairs work.

These are proposed actions, not commitments that the signatories have agreed to fund or complete.

Businesses are told to treat cyber defense as urgent

The letter called on every organization to make cyber defense an immediate leadership priority and address its highest-risk weaknesses.

Companies should strengthen security standards for the software they buy, build, and use, including code produced with AI, according to the letter. They should also limit people and software to the access they need, strengthen authentication, and use multiple layers of protection.

The coalition said companies can use lower-cost AI models to check more systems for weaknesses and reserve the most powerful models for harder security problems. When essential systems cannot be patched without interrupting operations, organizations should use other safeguards and verify that those protections work.

Technology providers would share tools and attack information

The letter calls for cybersecurity companies and technology providers to continuously test whether their defenses can withstand attacks using increasingly capable AI models.

They should also share information about attacks, tested response plans, and verified repairs so that work completed by one organization can help protect others.

The letter called on major AI developers to build tools that make AI systems easier to monitor. It also said companies should be able to identify AI agents operating in their systems, review what those agents did, and determine who authorized their actions.

OpenAI is accepting applications from additional organizations that want to add their names to the letter. Submissions require approval, and accepted organizations will be listed by name.

Red and blue cutaway illustration of a data center beside power lines, on AI critical infrastructure designation

Advocacy Group Asks The President To Designate AI As Critical Infrastructure

, , , , , , , , ,

A critical infrastructure designation would give AI companies 72 hours to report a cyberattack, put their data centers under federal security standards, and name the firms the government defends first.

 

Key Takeaways

  • Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI) asked the President to add AI to the critical infrastructure list, which already covers power, water, banking, and hospitals.
  • A 2022 law requires critical infrastructure companies to report cyberattacks within 72 hours, and a designation would extend that duty to AI companies. The law is not in force for anyone yet because CISA has not yet written the regulation that puts it into effect.
  • ARI says the need for critical infrastructure designation is urgent as adversaries are already attacking AI infrastructure.
    • ARI cited recent Iranian drone strikes that destroyed two Amazon data centers in the United Arab Emirates as proof.

 

Americans for Responsible Innovation, a Washington nonprofit that lobbies on technology policy, published a report on August 20 asking the President to add AI to the federal critical infrastructure list. Sixteen sectors sit on that list today.

ARI recommends including in the designation companies that build and train AI models, the data centers powering them, AI chip designers and manufacturers, and the platforms selling access. A critical infrastructure designation puts one federal agency in charge of the sector, requires its companies to report attacks, and ensures the government tells those companies what it knows about threats aimed at them.

Attacks on AI infrastructure have already done damage

ARI cites two attacks as examples of the need for designation. On March 1, Iran flew drones into two Amazon Web Services data centers in the United Arab Emirates, setting fires and cutting power. Banking and food delivery apps across the UAE stopped working, and Amazon’s status page still showed problems eleven days later.

The previous July, someone offered a routine code contribution to the public repository behind Amazon Q Developer, a coding assistant used inside a programmer’s editor. Amazon merged it, and a badly protected credential in its build system handed the contributor administrator access. They planted an instruction in the next official release telling the assistant to wipe the computer it ran on and delete the customer’s cloud account. Amazon published that release to the marketplace, where the assistant was downloaded more than 964,000 times. The instruction never ran, because whoever wrote it made a syntax error.

ARI says one corrupted model could damage many industries at once

AI now runs inside operations across finance, health care, energy, and government. Those companies mostly build their own AI tools, but nearly all of those tools sit on a small number of underlying models, running in data centers owned by a handful of cloud companies.

That is the risk ARI describes. An attacker who corrupts one widely used model does not damage one company. The corruption travels into everything built on that model.

This kind of attack is hard to notice. An AI system produces different output every time it runs, so a tampered one keeps answering and looks like it is working long after its answers stopped being reliable. And currently no rule requires the companies building those models to meet a security standard or disclose a breach, so the businesses running on them cannot spot the problem themselves, and nobody has to tell them. The government cannot see it either.

A designation would assign one federal agency to the sector, set security standards those companies must meet, and require them to report attacks, so a warning reaches the businesses downstream.

“AI systems are becoming increasingly integrated across industries, including health care, finance, and manufacturing, and without formal national security standards, an attack on these systems could lead to the incapacitation of these sectors at once,” said ARI policy analyst Jessica Maksimov, who wrote the report with Terrence Kelly.

AI companies would get 72 hours to report an attack

The designation would put AI companies under the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act of 2022, which gives companies in listed sectors 72 hours to tell the government they were attacked. AI companies currently have no federal reporting duty.

That requirement is not in force for anyone. A law of this kind takes effect only once the responsible agency writes the regulation that carries it out, and CISA, the federal cybersecurity agency, has missed its deadlines to do so. It now expects to publish this fall.

CISA and the Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI), the federal office that writes AI security guidance, would then publish security standards for AI data centers. ARI wants Congress to fund a CISA team to audit them.

A short list of AI companies would get government attention first

The agency would name the systemically important AI companies whose failure would do the country the most damage. The report says government protection, security requirements, and help reducing risk should start with these companies ahead of everyone else in the sector.

The last two sectors that asked were turned down

In 2024, the President declined to label space systems or the bioeconomy, meaning goods made from biological processes, as critical infrastructure. Officials said space systems were already spread across other sectors on the list, and that the bioeconomy’s risks were not sufficiently different from the risks those sectors already cover.

Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at a lectern for an article about California’s AI cyber defense program.

California Creates AI Cyber Defense Program for Critical Infrastructure

, , , , , , , ,

The state will give local governments and operators in energy, water, and transportation access to AI-assisted cyber defense capabilities.

 

California Gov. Gavin Newsom directed his administration to establish an AI cyber defense program within the California Cybersecurity Integration Center (Cal-CSIC). The program will use AI to find security weaknesses, strengthen networks, and help respond to cyberattacks. 

The program is intended to support state agencies and expand advanced cybersecurity capabilities to local governments and critical infrastructure operators.

New Program Adds AI to California’s Existing Cyber Support

Cal-CSIC already shares information about cyber threats and coordinates incident response with state and local agencies, utilities, and other public and private organizations.

The new program will add AI-assisted cybersecurity defenses, including vulnerability detection, network protection, and incident response, to that work.

Newsom also directed Cal-CSIC to expand access for local governments and critical infrastructure operators to advanced state cybersecurity capabilities, including AI-assisted defenses. The announcement names water, power, transportation, and emergency communications among the services the directive is intended to protect.

Caroline Thomas Jacobs, Director of the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, said, “This new program will help Cal OES and our partners detect threats sooner, share information more efficiently, strengthen defenses, and respond faster, helping keep these critical services safe and reliable for communities across California.”

Separately, every state agency must appoint an AI Cybersecurity Officer. The announcement does not specify the scope of responsibility of these newly created roles.

The new actions build on Cal-Secure 2.0, California’s existing cybersecurity roadmap for state agencies. That roadmap calls for greater use of AI-enabled security tools and stronger coordination across state government.

Mobile robot with sensors illustrating the FCC ban on foreign-produced mobile robots over AI security risks.

FCC Expands Foreign Hardware Ban Over AI Security Risks

, , , , , , , , ,

The restriction blocks new foreign-produced mobile robots and connected power inverters unless they receive a national security exemption.

 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) barred new foreign-produced mobile robots from entering the U.S. market, targeting security risks created by AI-powered machines that can collect data, interpret their surroundings, and move without direct human control.

The FCC did not limit the restriction to robots marketed as AI-powered. Instead, it covers foreign-produced mobile robots whose sensors, connectivity, and software allow them to navigate or move autonomously, collect data, or receive remote commands.

The FCC also restricted foreign-produced connected power inverters, which help manage electricity in power systems supporting, among other things, AI data centers and can create remote access points into those systems. 

The action applies only to new models. Foreign equipment authorized before July 28 can remain on the market.

Ban centers on AI robot risks

AI-powered mobile robots can use cameras, sensors and connected software to understand their surroundings and operate away from direct human supervision. Federal security agencies warned that compromised robots could collect sensitive information or allow an attacker to control their movement.

The FCC did not limit the restriction to products marketed as AI-powered. It covers connected mobile ground robots weighing more than 4.4 pounds that can sense their surroundings and operate away from a human supervisor. Their software may use AI or machine learning to interpret sensor information, control movement, collect data, or receive remote commands.

Each new covered foreign-produced model must receive federal security approval before it can seek FCC authorization. That creates a new barrier for Chinese and other foreign robotics manufacturers. Approval of an earlier model does not automatically clear later models.

Power inverters connect ban to AI infrastructure

The restriction also covers connected power inverters, used in managing electricity in systems that support AI data centers, among other power systems.

Federal security agencies warned that compromised inverters could interrupt electricity, provide remote access to connected systems, or expose sensitive information. The FCC added inverters and mobile robots to its Covered List after a White House-convened group of national security agencies determined that the devices could threaten critical infrastructure and U.S. security.

Ban is on new models only

The restriction applies only to new models. Companies and consumers can continue using previously purchased devices, and retailers can keep selling foreign-produced models the FCC authorized before July 28.

A separate FCC waiver allows previously authorized robots and power inverters to continue receiving software, firmware and security updates until at least Jan. 1, 2029. Federal purchases and use are also unaffected.

 

Foreign manufacturers can seek an exemption. The U.S. Department of Defense can approve covered robots or power inverters, while the Department of Homeland Security can also approve inverters. Manufacturers that receive approval can then apply for FCC authorization.

The White House South Lawn and fountain on a clear day, site of the Gold Eagle AI cyber defense announcement

White House Launches Gold Eagle To Coordinate AI-Driven Cyber Defense

, , , , , , , ,

The new initiative will connect AI developers, software companies, and critical infrastructure operators to identify and patch vulnerabilities before attackers can exploit them.

 

The White House launched a cybersecurity initiative called Gold Eagle to help companies and government agencies share information about software vulnerabilities discovered by advanced AI systems.

Announced Tuesday, the program brings together federal agencies, AI developers, and operators of critical infrastructure. The administration said Gold Eagle has already begun collecting and prioritizing vulnerability reports and coordinating responses.

Gold Eagle was created under President Trump’s June 2 executive order, “Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security.” According to the White House, the initiative is intended to reduce duplicate scanning efforts and speed up the process of getting vulnerability information to the organizations responsible for fixing the flaws.

The effort is led by the White House, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Homeland Security through the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and the Department of Defense. Officials said the participating organizations will coordinate responses to vulnerabilities identified by increasingly capable AI systems.

The White House did not identify the companies participating in Gold Eagle.

European Union flags flying outside the European Commission building, marking the EU Action Plan on AI Cybersecurity

EU Launches Cybersecurity Plan For Advanced AI Threats

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Commission says advanced AI could help attackers find weaknesses and automate cyberattacks, forcing Europe to rethink how it tests and defends critical systems.

 

The European Commission released a new Action Plan on Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence, warning that advanced AI could make cyberattacks faster, larger, and easier to automate.

The plan treats advanced AI as both a cybersecurity tool and a cybersecurity risk. The Commission said AI can help detect vulnerabilities, prevent attacks and protect critical infrastructure. But it also warned that malicious actors can use the same technology to find weaknesses, automate attacks and carry out cyber operations at greater speed and scale.

“AI is transforming the meaning of cybersecurity. And we must keep pace,” said Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy. She said the goal is to turn advanced AI into a tool for stronger cyber defense while limiting its use by attackers.

 

What the plan does

The plan lays out several steps for managing advanced AI in cybersecurity.

First, the Commission said it will create a process for independent experts to test advanced AI models before they enter the EU market, giving the AI Office outside assessments of what those models can do and what risks they may create.

Second, the Commission said it will work with the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), the EU’s cybersecurity agency, to set rules for giving trusted public agencies, researchers and companies controlled access to advanced AI systems for cybersecurity testing and defense.

Third, ENISA and the Commission’s Joint Research Centre will create a secure testing platform for AI cybersecurity tools. The platform will use simulated environments so organizations can test AI systems safely before using them in sensitive settings.

The Commission said the testing effort will focus on critical sectors, including energy, transport, health, finance, and public administration.

 

Critical infrastructure

The plan also tells organizations not to treat AI as a substitute for basic cybersecurity. The Commission said companies and public agencies should first strengthen core defenses, including risk management, secure system design, and incident response.

Once those basics are in place, the Commission said organizations should use available AI tools, including open-source models where appropriate, to identify software weaknesses more quickly and improve cyber defense.

The European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) will support that work with guidance and best practices. The Commission also said ENISA will work to secure critical open-source software, though it did not provide details on what that will entail.

 

Europe’s AI cyber capacity

The Commission said it will launch an EU Grand Challenge on AI for cybersecurity, a competition-style program meant to bring companies, researchers and other organizations together to build AI-powered cyber defense tools.

The plan also says Europe will need more computing power, AI infrastructure and investment to build those tools, instead of relying entirely on technology developed elsewhere.

 

The plan builds on existing EU rules, including the AI Act.

Load More